skysight-inc/HackerNews huggingface dataset:
many software problems boil down to badly done X, where X is some paradigm, technology or technique. Then someone concludes, like this article, that it is pointless / to be avoided etc. It would instead be better that you write an article where you steelman X, then compare it to Y, and look at the comparative advantages. Badly done X or Y should always be highlighted but not really used as a reason not to do X or Y. If you can steelman X and show that even best effort has far too many disadvantages, and there doesn't seem a way forward to overcome them compared to other approaches, then sure, call it out. What I see is often new things have less history of people badly doing it compared to the old things that have a lot of examples of people badly doing it and they mistake that as the old thing as being bad.
Fwiw, many games uses a different representation of state and behaviour than standard OO, called entity-component-system (ECS): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Entity_component_system

ECS doesn't represent game objects with standard OO such as classes in C++/Java/C#. You can argue about whether it's still OO in principle, but it's not the kind of OO an enterprise developer would recognise.
Excellent writeup, thank you!
I think there have always been potential "investors" that never really lost money because they were never investors in the first place. Lots of Robinhood, r/wsb users/members are 1st time traders because Robinhood significantly lower the barrier to entry for investing, and they don't feel as alone and scary once found an online community similar to themselves.
for my own code, I use 'me' instead of 'self'. Just makes more sense to me; e.g. me.variable that is, the one referenced right here ('me') is being referenced, not from anywhere else. It's also shorter; and I think more descriptive. But that's just me.
Seems to be some talk about an IPO for Starlink as a spinoff, but not SpaceX itself.
It’s not just the amount of capital. Tesla put its capital at risk when the risk was much higher. When it’s company was smaller relative to scale. Volkswaggen got a free ride to see if the experiment works, at no cost / risk, and now they need to somehow contribute otherwise to build your own and let antitrust law break all the proprietary channels into one common later (and risk your capital).
What makes me ill is that the insider trading rule makes sense. It protects congress from lawsuits when their mutual fund or ETF owns Tesla and they benefit by enacting laws that benefit their constituents, but that have downsides for others.

The rule however assumes that congress conducts themselves ethically, and evidently that is clearly not the case.
> stop rearranging the chairs and get on with sailing the ship

I had never heard this before (though it even has a wiktionary entry), what a beautiful way to put it, thank you. It's really ridiculous, the amount of time we waste on readable, testable implementations with enough performance, just because they're not the proper version of an idea in the reviewer's mind.

It's not what DDD says! This is not how Scrum works! That's not functional programming! These aren't real unit tests!

One thing in common I notice in this sort of pointless bickering is that how they're always about how "X is not real/proper Y", and they almost never point out an actual antipattern you might need to avoid due to reasons. The argument is purely philosophical from the very beginning, without much thought on what the implications are, if any.

And I'm beginning to attribute this to incompetence. Not always -- there is always that one colleague who's a genius thinker in one dimension, not quite focused on delivery, and that's fine. We all need the occasional course correction, we all stand on the shoulders of giants. But it's often enough that I feel I'm expected to give one of those acronyms, just so that the other person can use a preset line of scrutiny: nevermind paying any attention to whether the tests actually validate the program, or if the design is unambigous and extensible, etc.

It's like a version of the "factory worker"-style developer -- you know, he who exists to be a pseudocode-to-actualcode translator, always expects a perfectly well-defined set of specs, a design to implement that within, and won't move a muscle except to complain about how everyone else isn't doing their job unless those are all satisfied. Yes, it's exhausting.

Thank you for accommodating my rant if you read this far, dear reader; thank you OP for bringing out the salt I didn't realize I had today! Apologies if I digressed too far there.
Don't know exactly how, but the data are availble. One source is https://s3partners.com/, not to be confused with Amazon S3
> 4chan hosts it's own server: — how could it?

ISPs could just drop their customers' traffic to that server. This happens all the time and has happened to 4chan before.

Or they could go further and refuse to peer with any ISP that doesn't block 4chan, or lobby to have the government compel ISPs to block it, likely on think-of-the-children or think-of-the-terrorism grounds.

Self hosting definitely isn't some magic way of preventing all censorship.
I can't imagine that wheel is going to be particularly easy to do three-point turns in.
I can see how it’d seem that way. Few years ago a friend who worked marketing referred me to a senior “platform engineer” position in his org. I asked about on-call in the interview, the interviewer filibustered and never really answered the question. I tactfully pressed and made it clear this was an important topic to me in evaluating employers.

They finally relented and explained Seniors had a two week rotation. When it came time to talk about salary I gave them a number about 20% higher than my norm (mind you: the job ad didn’t list a salary, nor a salary range, I was interviewing totally blind about what even the floor was)-effectively, in my mind an extra 10% for every week I was to be ‘on-call’.

Trail went cold, emailed asking for a follow up, recruiter never responded, ghosted. Found out from my friend the following week, when she called and asked “what did you SAY in that interview? They told me you weren’t a good culture fit”

“I asked what the on-call schedule was like”

The way I see it, a bullet was dodged.

Anecdote to put in your tea, if it helps.
Building a Culture of On-Site Self-Care Strategies
Whether Freddy Mercury was gay or bi is a culture war which doesn't need to be fought. He can and does represent both gay people and bi people in transcending heterosexual norms.

Young people sometimes use the word "gay" to express a complex sexuality which doesn't categorise neatly with a label. It's understood that you can be both "gay" and "bi" simultaneously, or indeed you can be a man who has sex with men who is straight.

The only person in this chat who is trying to put strict labels based on behaviour is you (the other commenter only observed some behaviour without labelling), so it seems like you're arguing with yourself?
One of the recent situations that I've heard about are nurse practitioners and doctors at your doctor's practice, contracted by your in-network doctor. The person who comes into the room to ask you what you're there about may not be in-network even though the ostensible doctor-in-charge is.
Ask HN: Why does no one seem to be using Google Duo?
Duo seems like a good solution for "hangout" video calling but it definitely does not seem as popular as other apps right now, I'm wondering why people are passing up on Duo in favor of other applications
> "You are probably familiar with the interoperability of x86 platforms."

That interoperability exists because Microsoft holds sole control of what the definition of a Windows compatible x86 computer is through its Windows Hardware Compatibility Program: https://docs.microsoft.com/en-us/windows-hardware/design/com... All free operating systems running on commodity x86 laptops, PCs, and servers ride on the coattails of this platform standardization.

Microsoft does not have an equivalent for ARM, nor do any of the big names in ARM processors/systems want them to, largely because they all dream of being the one holding the same (lucrative) level of control someday themselves.
They clearly haven’t tried navigating treatment options in markets without insurance. I’m glad they are privileged enough (from the insurance) to make those complaints.
> By buying a Tesla you're supporting the notion that proprietary connections are good.

You continue to say this, but your evidence is nonexistent for this claim. Standards exist, Tesla doesn't use them for <reasons>, therefore if you buy a Tesla you disagree that standards are good.

I bought a Tesla, I agree standards are good, I wish Tesla would use a standard connector. They don't, because of vendor lock-in. We agree.

We agree that a standardized port is both good and possible. You keep arguing with me like I'm arguing against you on this point, I am not. That is the straw man.

Also:

> yet you also think they're not purposefully pushing their proprietary connector for vendor lock-in reasons

No, I know that they are doing this for lock-in reasons. That was literally in my prior post, perhaps you missed it.

What I AM saying is that the claim that eliminating vendor lock-in will make DC fast charging better for everyone is false. You're right that I care more about fast charging and increased adoption more than standards, because I think we will eventually have standards and it will all be fine.

I don't think that mandating standards now will make fast charging better, which is the thing I care about. I argued strongly for this and you did not refute any of it, instead continuing to argue that those who buy Teslas must not care about standards and are supporting vendor lock-in. Even if true (and I disagree), it's irrelevant.

If you care about standards more than about EV adoption, fast charging proliferation (which I think is a prereq for adoption), then sure, I disagree with you. I think the latter are net better for humanity than avoiding a fragmented charging ecosystem.

You seem to think that a fragmented ecosystem is what will suppress adoption, but I think you are wrong -- I think taking away the incentives of those who are deploying fast charging at scale (i.e., Tesla, for vendor lock-in) will do much more harm than good: in that world, no one will be financially incentivized to build fast charging without market intervention, which perhaps you support but are not arguing for.

And I think present-day vendor lock-in is a small price to pay for 10-years-from-now higher EV adoption.
Reply-reply (not sure what the purpose of the edit was?):

Clearly discord doesn't want to actively suggest illegal activity happened on their platform, so they're not going to state that as their reason.

I guess in the face of your "proof", I'm brazenly suggesting that this marks the first time in history a corporate PR department has lied about the company's motivations.
I got a very nice discount on some dental work that was considered 'cosmetic' and not covered by my shitty dental insurance who thought amalgams were just fine for molars. They were going to pay like 25% or something silly like that.

So we went sliding scale uninsured, and despite being in the top end of the scale, I ended up paying about 1/3 less than I would have through insurance. I probably still ended up subsidizing some kid who needed fillings worse than I did, which was the only silver lining in that whole stupid affair.
Due to their leverage, they have far more than 13 billion worth of exposure.
I find this, similar to the arguments against robinhood and extremists on social media, basically boils down to treating people as sheep and wanting to protect them from themselves.

I think it is a stretch to say r/wsb insiders are obviously taking advantage of newcomers. You can’t spend much time with WSB without developing some financial literacy, and there are compelling ideas. It is not just flexing and hype. Also, I don’t think there is a precedent (such as the pyramid scheme) for what they are doing in the market.

I think there is some truth to your mention of young Reddit person being vulnerable, but I think it is risky trying to protect them with regulation.
Indeed. WSJ:

> Melvin Capital Management, which managed $12.5 billion at the start of the year, had lost nearly 30% for the year through Friday due largely to its array of bets against companies including GameStop, said people familiar with the fund.

Quite interesting that parent article, as detailed as it is, somehow missed a much reported 30% drawdown.
The state I live in did not accept the expanded Medicaid/Medicare funding.
They could leverage their brand and hype to pivot into new business, supposedly. Maybe it's another WeWork situation where they have a lot of retail and claim to be tech but never make the switch into true tech.
> I simply don't understand the explosion of complexity associated to autotools, cmake, and the like.

If you refer to tools like cmake as "explosion of complexity" then I have to say that you are using them entirely wrong, and you should review your practice thoroughly.

I mean, cmake is a makefile generator. You specify a high-level description of your project, and then you run cmake for it to generate your Makefile that performs the whole build.

With cmake you don't even care which compiler you use. You can simply state you require, say, c++ 14 with constexpr support and you're done for all platforms and all compiler picks.

If you believe cmake is more complex than a makefile then either you only work on single-foot projects or you have been cursed with hideously managed cmake projects.
What obligation does UW have to listen to him? Better to make a fuss on Twitter and let this get to donors who will have a thing or two to say to the department chair and head of school/deans/provost/president.
There are so many assumptions in this narrative that have no foundation. (Neither repetition and emotion are signals of truth; the inflammation and use of those things is a good signal that some manipulation is going on and that facts are lacking.)

* The 'little guy' is powering this movement. We don't know who is leading it and who is pushing it. We do know that social media is often used for mass manipulation, leading large numbers into highly delusional, angry territory.

* The intention is retribution: We don't know who is pushing this or why.

* The 'little guy' will benefit: Investment activities with no economic benefit will lose money, in a functioning market. The 'little guys' are the ones who most need an increase in economic activity and suffer most from the economic loss, especially right now.

* Markets are gambling: Financial markets serve an economic benefit to the public; otherwise they have no purpose. Market activity that has no economic benefit wastes precious resources. It denies resources to the people who are most productive to them,and gives them to the unproductive and sometimes to the corrupt, empowering them.

* This angry mob is driving GameStop's securities prices: Do we have evidence that it's not others?

* Regulations are to control the 'little guy': Regulations protect everyone from fraud and stabilize our markets. Not all regulations are well-intended or perfect, but an unregulated market is not realistic or desirable.

* There is a 'little guy' and 'big guy': These are just arbitrary divisions with no definition, and they may have nothing to so with the situation. Whenever something goes wrong, there are always people who will try to gain power buy inflaming a mob and pointing them toward a target. In the past, it was often religion that was used. We know this technique is often used on social media, to great effect.

What I see is an angry mob. I wouldn't treat it as anything else. Edit: Looking at past angry mobs and financial bubbles, it's the mob that suffers. Someone else will make money off of them.
Where is "ansible"? (Faster-than-light text-only channel) Coined by LeGuin, but also used by Card and others
My Toyota Tercel and I cannot imagine 0-60 in two seconds.
Lol, if you want to attack anything that stops companies from controlling politics, abusing monopoly powers, and paying no taxes, maybe you should open with that.
> By "radicalized" he means, "Will cause them to buy and hold more GameStop to continue the pain until Wall Street learns to back down."

What's the endgame? Sell at some point? At a profit or a loss?

Seems like in that scenario anger would play to the hands of the people who bought earlier and can sell to newcomers...
There's also the option of giving a fine to corporations that don't want to cooperate on infrastructure. They should have freedom to shape the deal, in some proportion to their power on the market, but they have to cooperate.
Nobody is allowed to hold GME on margin anymore. Haven't been able to for weeks.
' She found that whilst Milgram's originally published article mentioned some forty participants, of which some twenty-six proved to be obedient, some seven hundred naive participants were actually "tested" in various experimental scenarios with varying results as to their "obedience". '

p-hacking way back in the day.
What Neoliberals Believe
Founder here - I provided a few more details here:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25936813

I agree with you, automated open graph images are not a problem worth paying lots of money to solve. That's pretty much the exact realisation I had at the mid point in this timeline - see the "Rebrand" section for the details.

So at that point I pivoted Bannerbear to be able to generate any kind of image, for any purpose.

New use cases are things like, generating ad variations, generating instagram posts, generating dynamic in-app images (e.g. in the welcome email for Bannerbear you get a personalized image header which is generated on-the-fly by Bannerbear) and these use cases are a lot more valuable to the end users.
"Pump and dump schemes absolutely should not be supported. Piling into a short squeeze is not a pump and dump scheme."

LOL. Give me a break.

This is ___100%___ a P&D scam. They can squeeze shorts because they target trash stocks of failing businesses (you know -- the stocks that get shorted), then create a positively ridiculous story about a value proposition. A bunch of moron retail investors on Reddit aren't going to do shit to squeeze shorts, but they're the front for a couple of very well financed players.

But...something something Nancy Pelosi. Christ. Yeah, she's really scamming the system playing a stock at all time highs. Real elite moves.
Over the years I've learned when you think something is pointless, you just don't have enough experience to see why it's useful.

jphoward's comment is spot on.
You could have said the same about $TSLA or $AMZN at some point in their history. If stocks were rational, TSLA shorts would have made money last year instead of losing billoins.
Hi Alex, I just want you to know, I really admire what you're doing, and I hope you're wildly successful at it!
Yes, if the subject of the story is "overcrowding at popular park despite coronavirus" it is intensely dishonest to exclusively use shots taken with long lenses.
Manage Chroot Environments with Schroot (2018)
Can you provide some factual basis for these claims? We can type out claims without foundation endlessly; the Internet demonstrates that well; what we need is real knowledge and facts.
Siri, what is Amazon's P/E ratio?
I remember someone mentioning this example:

https://vimeo.com/152514220

In this scene (if I remember correctly) the man on the right is coolly allowing the man on the left to believe that he's being threatened with being sent (by the approaching airplane) to another country where he would suffer a terrible fate.

The scene is meant to make it look like the airplane pilot has deliberately executed an impressive landing right next to the men, but apparently in real life it was quite far away (like a runway's length or so).
Ha, yeah - though except for "the medieval London murder rate would be 15 to 20 times higher".
No one is buying this stock because they want this junk company, it's all manipulation. They have an army of buyers and use some calculated techniques with options to gain leverage. They're not all college students in for $100. I know of people who have borrowed 6-digit sums to get in on this bet.

Potentially there are also pros on the WSB side of this game but I think they would potentially face legal risks that the individuals don't have to worry about.
This is why I didn’t get really excited about WebRTC when I looked into it before.

And the problem isn’t with WebRTC, it’s with the current infrastructure of the net that prevents some clients from just communicating directly without some element of centralization. And some of it’s our own fault.

A cynical way of looking at it might be that WebRTC is being allowed because it helps scale the web while still being dependent on a central weak link of control.

But it is what it is.
Are there any claims in that post?
Being from the UK, I hear it all the time to refer to cigarettes. When I worked in a shop, my colleagues would just walk through the shop and say "just taking a f* break". While it was totally inoffensive, it did make me a bit uncomfortable. Piquing my sjw sensitivities, I guess
What was Elon's tweet? I don't really follow these things, sorry.
It's after hours trading, which is very low volume and generally not available to most retail investors. Probably just another hedge fund getting in their shorts at these high prices. The FUD spread due to the plunge in after hours is just a bonus for their new short position.

Further, I think everyone is drastically over estimating the impact of r/wsb and retail investors in general on the GME action. This is hedge fund vs. hedge fund in an opportunity for unusually outsized gains on both the long and short positions over relatively short time frames. Good for them to keep the narrative focused on retail investors rather than capitalist titans in a financial blood bath.
Any trader knows that after-hours price action does not necessarily translate or carry over into RTH. It is much easier for price to be manipulated in thin after-hours trading.
The US is kind of unique in a lot of its healthcare dysfunctions and there are a lot of individual policies that might help.

For example, one thing most other developed countries do is have a central state agency negotiate prices for drugs for the whole country at once, which exerts a lot of buying power to drive costs down.

The idea of Medicare in the US doing that has been proposed several times, but has been blocked, most famously during the initial ObamaCare debate.

The stated reason for blocking that is that decreasing reimbursements would decrease the profit motive for pharma companies to innovate and create new drugs. The more practical reason is.... probably just that lobbyists exist.

But that is just one policy among many. We are simple folk here at the MCCPDC, we just charge less. :-)
> $3 billion in fines Wells Fargo paid

This had ZERO to do with Front Running.
Some interesting observations:

In the last few hours, the WSB Discord was banned for 'hate speech' and the WSB subreddit had to close for a while because of a massive influx of bots. To me, that does not really seem like an indication of the short squeeze being over and the big players being safe out of the game.

And yet, the prevalent opinion here seems to be that retail investors can only lose from here on out... what am I missing?
AGPL might make sense with dual licensing so that any potential commercial competitors who use your library have to give you a vig, but anyone willing to use a compatible free license can use your code.
Show u HN: Treewu,a temporarily fun social network with messy UI
That’s about the same price as on Amazon in the US.

Poverty is real and for them every dollar counts.